CaptainLars

RJTT: from an arrival to an approach without a connecting wpt

Recommended Posts

Hi again,

 

lastly I was approaching RJTT. ProATC-X assigned me DARKS Arrival to Rwy 34R VOR-A Approach.

 

Judging by the charts (which are from 2014/15), DARKS arrival can end up twofold: via LDA approach to Rwy 22 or 23 and a VOR-A approach to Rwys 16L/R via a described noise abatement procedure with visual giding lights.

 

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/11/22/rjtt-tokio-haneda/

 

But: there is no description of an approach to Rwy 34R from DARKS wpt, and there is no published VOR-A Approach for Rwy 34R at all. I took a look at the Navigraph thumbnails and judging from that, I don't think there's one in the present cycle as well.

 

Yet, the current Navigraph AIRAC cycle knows a Rwy 34R VOR-A approach. PFPX knows it, ProATC-X knows it, and the PMDG 777 knows it as well. The Nav display shows the magenta line along DARKS and SAZAN and then via MA274 to the missed approach hold, at no point getting close to the extended rwy center line, just passing diagonally over the aerodrome.

 

I know this is not PMDG's "fault", but I'd like to know whether this is completely wrong (i. e., there must be a fault or a bug somewhere in the AIRAC data, or the problem must be in the obsolete charts), or if there is a method, something that any pilot supposedly knows and anybody expects in such a situation so that it can pass unmentioned in the charts? Or that escaped me?

 

Personally I turned left to something like a right downwind (ATC had cleared me for 700ft by then, so I was VERY low above the bay of Tokyo), and then right-turned to rwy heading. It resulted in a safe landing in the end.

 

So, what to do in such a situation? Could anyone tell me how to get from DARKS Arrival to Rwy 34R VOR-A Approach?

 

Thank you very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hi,

 

I findthis kind of situation quite a lot in Canada where all the AIRACs give SID and STARS that are not depicted on Navigraph charts and I don't know why neither.

In your case, there is the ILS Y 34R which starts at Kaiho which seems to be the first waypoint of the STAR Darks. Maybe could you catch the ILS from that point instead of going up to Darks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been a lot easier to start the APPROACH at Kaiho instead of going via DARKS. But ATC told me so... and PFPX thought the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is no description of an approach to Rwy 34R from DARKS wpt, and there is no published VOR-A Approach for Rwy 34R at all.

 

I looked at my Jepps and we do not have a VOR-A to RWY34R.  The DARKS RNAV is for LDA Y 23.  So the routing would be DARKS..DOMEL

 

I don't go into RJTT but use as an alternate for RJAA weather permitting.  If I were going into RJTT I would expect an RNAV arrival with vectors to the LOC.  

 

In todays modern ATC, especially for RNAV equipped aircraft the normal procedure would be an RNAV arrival to the LOC.

 

blaustern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for your insight. I posted the issue over at Navigraph and they too stated there's no VOR-A for 34R. They also stated that the transition from DARKS to 34R would be done by vectoring normally. The also stated that this combination is not explicitly forbidden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


The also stated that this combination is not explicitly forbidden.



 

On my plates the DARKS RNAV is for RWY23 only.   :smile: 

 

If you will look at the DARKS RNAV arrival you will notice that it brings aircraft from south of RJTT to the northeast side to position them for landing to the southwest. 

 

 

 


They also stated that the transition from DARKS to 34R would be done by vectoring normally.

 

ATC will almost always bring an aircraft over specific fixes for specific runways.  The DARKS RNAV starts at KAIHO intersection which is an IAF for the ILS RWY34 L/R.   ATC is not going to put an aircraft on the DARKS RNAV arrival so the aircraft can be vectored back to RWY34R,. It just doesn't work that way in the real world.  :smile: 

 

blaustern 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blaustern, I agree 100% with you. I was trying to figure out what happened on that specific flight of mine and "whose fault" it was, if it was mine, Navigraph's or ProATC-X's... In the meantime, Navigraph has made a more elaborate statement:

 

 

 

Hi Lars,
I will try to explain where the problem is with such approaches ... the VOR-A approach is a CTL approach. A CTL approach has no runway ident but every addon needs at least a runway. So, we had two options: exclude such procedures or include it with an workaround. Exclude was no option because the initial question was about the CTLs in Funchial/Madeira - therefore we decided to develop a workaround. The workaround makes following: add a runway ident to each CTL approaches. There is no reference in the ARINC424 standard-source, for which runway this CTL is valid therefore I add ALL runways of an airport to such CTL approaches, to know that some runways are not valid. We don´t have enough information in the dataset to connect CTL approaches to the right runway. Therefore the wrong existing VOR-A approaches on the runways of 34. Sorry, there is no possibility to fix it without exclude all CTL approaches.
Hope that helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you got it worked out, or at least got an explanation that makes sense. 

 

Now just to beat the weather into KDFW tonight. :smile: 

 

blaustern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From FSX Acceleration I did a flight plan RJAH rwy 3R to RJTT rwy 23 and landed weird. PMDG 747 v2, V3 and 777 did touchdown far away from runway 23 and won't speed down brakes non responsive. How to land on the runway as it should instead of few feet before runway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, trisho0 said:

From FSX Acceleration I did a flight plan RJAH rwy 3R to RJTT rwy 23 and landed weird. PMDG 747 v2, V3 and 777 did touchdown far away from runway 23 and won't speed down brakes non responsive. How to land on the runway as it should instead of few feet before runway?

Could be many things, but without a lot more information it is only a guess.  This ideally would be a new topic since it has little to do with the original post.

My guess is you are using default scenery and the current day RJTT has had runway work done and they are extended?? Maybe.  The PMDG FMS uses navdata based on current data, and has no knowledge of what scenery gets rendered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, trisho0 said:

 How to land on the runway as it should instead of few feet before runway?

Manually

 

errors can occure in the real world too and pilots will have to deal with it. You‘re the pilot, fly your airplane.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, downscc said:

This ideally would be a new topic since it has little to do with the original post.

Thank you, I will proceed a new thread with more info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/22/2016 at 7:41 AM, CaptainLars said:

Hi again,

 

lastly I was approaching RJTT. ProATC-X assigned me DARKS Arrival to Rwy 34R VOR-A Approach.

 

Judging by the charts (which are from 2014/15), DARKS arrival can end up twofold: via LDA approach to Rwy 22 or 23 and a VOR-A approach to Rwys 16L/R via a described noise abatement procedure with visual giding lights.

 

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/11/22/rjtt-tokio-haneda/

 

But: there is no description of an approach to Rwy 34R from DARKS wpt, and there is no published VOR-A Approach for Rwy 34R at all. I took a look at the Navigraph thumbnails and judging from that, I don't think there's one in the present cycle as well.

 

Yet, the current Navigraph AIRAC cycle knows a Rwy 34R VOR-A approach. PFPX knows it, ProATC-X knows it, and the PMDG 777 knows it as well. The Nav display shows the magenta line along DARKS and SAZAN and then via MA274 to the missed approach hold, at no point getting close to the extended rwy center line, just passing diagonally over the aerodrome.

 

I know this is not PMDG's "fault", but I'd like to know whether this is completely wrong (i. e., there must be a fault or a bug somewhere in the AIRAC data, or the problem must be in the obsolete charts), or if there is a method, something that any pilot supposedly knows and anybody expects in such a situation so that it can pass unmentioned in the charts? Or that escaped me?

 

Personally I turned left to something like a right downwind (ATC had cleared me for 700ft by then, so I was VERY low above the bay of Tokyo), and then right-turned to rwy heading. It resulted in a safe landing in the end.

 

So, what to do in such a situation? Could anyone tell me how to get from DARKS Arrival to Rwy 34R VOR-A Approach?

 

Thank you very much!

I am a regular visitor flying into RJTT in real life. 

 

First of all, there is no such thing as a VOR34R approach based on the charts I have. 

 

There is a VOR34L approach which uses HME VOR for the approach. 

I am not sure which direction you came in, the DARKS arrival begins with a waypoint KAIHO, this arrival is not very often used, so I assume you flew in from south west of japan.  

 

However LDA 22 appr is frequently used whenever there is a Southly wind. So you could have just continue on the LDA 22 appr land on rwy 22. 

 

For HND if you come from the south for rwy 34 normally you will get Arlon / KAIHO arrival. And Bacon arrival for LDA rwy 22. 

 

The VOR 34L and Highway visual 34R begins at a waypoint Cacao which is part of the CACHE arrival. 

 

VOR A 16L/R is almost never used these days. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Driverab330 said:

I am a regular visitor flying into RJTT in real life. 

A pleasure to find a Pilot here. What about runway 23 did you land on with ILS? I found PMDG 747 v2 FMC NAV showing 230 heading. And PMDG 747 v3 shows 232. What do you set on MCP HDG window?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, trisho0 said:

What do you set on MCP HDG window?

Set the HDG to whatever you want, the course is the salient variable and it is automatically set based on the navdata.  What you are you using the HDG for?  If for go around then set it according to go around procedures, usually but not always the runway heading (a 2 deg difference is insignificant, you are protected by TERPS in an area that accommodates much larger errors).  Don't compare things like this with the legacy version of the product...., too many pitfalls there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, downscc said:

Set the HDG to whatever you want, the course is the salient variable and it is automatically set based on the navdata.

Yes, I set HDG according what FMC NAV says regardless of what MFD ITD displays after LOC. Example, on 747 v2 I set HDG 230 following FMC and after LOC I can see ITD 232 which is 2 degrees ILS offset and learned I have to disengage Autopilot to  land manually on runway. With 747 v3 I set HDG 232 which is from FMC NAV and after LOC the ITD is 232 as well then AP off and manual landing. So, I don't set HDG without confirming the info from FMC NAV. Am I wrong? I have to point out I am learning with sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, trisho0 said:

Am I wrong? I have to point out I am learning with sim.

I don't know if you are wrong, if you have a logical reason for doing what you are doing with the HDG.  For me, setting the HDG to final course so that I will fly that heading on go around, so there are approaches where I might set the HDG to the missed approach heading.  During approach, the aircraft is not flying the heading but is flying a course so the only reason to use HDG is for the Plan B that you are going to use if you abort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, downscc said:

For me, setting the HDG to final course so that I will fly that heading on go around, so there are approaches where I might set the HDG to the missed approach heading. 

Hi Pilot, I am not talking about G/A and your APP procedures I understand about. I was concerned about HDG planning to land. So, when ILS is offset I have to land manually. My question was related between 747 v2 and v3. I learned 747 v2 is legacy so I would have to set HDG accordingly following FMC NAV. The 747 V3 I found is different, updated I guess. I love both and flying with v2 sometimes and v3 another times because I am still learning to handle VC. Also, 747 v3 demands more memory like the T7. So, it depends of the scenery is when I fly 747 v2 or v3. TechnoBrain RJTT gets close to OOMS with T7 and 747 v3. That's why I still have the 747 v2. Anyway, back to HDG settings I think you gave me a good advice and thanks a lot for helping me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, trisho0 said:

A pleasure to find a Pilot here. What about runway 23 did you land on with ILS? I found PMDG 747 v2 FMC NAV showing 230 heading. And PMDG 747 v3 shows 232. What do you set on MCP HDG window?

No. Most of the time when rwy 22 and 23 is used they prefer to use the LDA approach. 

 

What achtally happen is both LDA 22 and 23 appr will be used simultaneously and rwy 16L/R will be used for departures only. Where LdA22 is for those who comes in from the south and LDA 23 for those who arrives from the north. And the arrival path cross each other with just 1000ft separation on base leg to intercept the offset localizer. 

Only when the weather gets really bad in a southly wind condition the ILS 22/23 will be used. 

 

And the reason being RJTT is only 30mm to the west from RJAA (Narita), and the use of LDA approach effective routes all the traffic over Tokyo bay before begin their descend for the approacH. 

However if the ILS22/23 is used the arrival traffic would have to go further east which effects the traffic flow in RJAA (Narita). 

 

Have a look flight radar every now and then, during afternoon hours of tokyo (which quite often is effected by southly sea breeze), you will be able to see how they arrange both RJTT and RJAA traffic flow. It is quite interesting.

 

and don’t forget that the ILS23 is offset a degree as well, that’s why here is a track discrepancy between the FMC ILS track and rwy HDG. So don’t try to perform an autoland on rwy23. (This is similar to ILS22R in KJFK, also offset 2-3deg if I remember correctly). 

 

There is a RNP 23 approach which is quite fun to “watch” although I personally prefer the LDA because I love flying the airplane myself. 

However the PMDG777 VNAV path doesn’t behave like what the real airplane or the levelD sim does, and it doesn’t simulate RF leg as well. Thats why doing the RNP appr in flight sim sometimes can be painful. 

 

Personally i love flying into these airports, they always a bit challenging especially RJAA with the wind.

 

And Japanese airports are probably the cleaniest in the world I must say. Everything is neat and tidy. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Driverab330 said:

However the PMDG777 VNAV path doesn’t behave like what the real airplane or the levelD sim does, and it doesn’t simulate RF leg as well. Thats why doing the RNP appr in flight sim sometimes can be painful. 

Agree.., hopefully PMDG will finally get past the navdata issue soon (soon as in the next year or two).  The data structure in use is almost two decades old and cannot represent ARINC-424 data well. I know they are working on it, I just don't know how far along they are for it represents a major change to the FMS in all their products.  As for VNAV I also agree and find that the QOTSII is the first product that does a pretty good job with the vertical path.  I assume they will take the 744 code and work it into whatever it is that they are doing next, such as the 748, so VNAV performace will improve along with the RNP capabilities.  Just takes time.

Does anyone develop sceneries for Japanese airports besides WCI Narita, which is very dated now and doesn't have current taxi structure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FlyTampa are doing RJTT. I listen in to liveatc to get correct real life procedures for airports I do not know.  - David Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 6:05 PM, 777200lrf said:

FlyTampa are doing RJTT. I listen in to liveatc to get correct real life procedures for airports I do not know.  - David Lee

WOW! if FlyTampa makes RJTT I go there indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Tuesday, November 28, 2017 at 0:05 AM, 777200lrf said:

FlyTampa are doing RJTT. I listen in to liveatc to get correct real life procedures for airports I do not know.  - David Lee

 

10 hours ago, trisho0 said:

WOW! if FlyTampa makes RJTT I go there indeed!

Me too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now